The scottian female and the scottian male. Ooh La La

Alright. Listen up people. Time for a scottian post. After all I am a scott. As you may or may not have heard, we at the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) have been “experimenting” with bringing out our other aspects in order to try to experience the reality of the other two.* Well we scotts have the most difficulty doing this because we feel there is no need to change. Why even bother?

Anyway, I was talking with the Progenitor Clark the other day. Rather than discuss me and my clark-like aspect he asked me what I experienced when I observed another scott. This was my answer:

Hmmm… where to begin. Speaking from the scottian female aspect (reacting to a scottian male) there is an energy. Of course there is no mistaking the eyes. Intense. Darting back and forth, taking everything in, all the while wearing a grin that can’t be ignored. Limits are tested through a simple “ping pong game-like” conversation. Does one pull back? Admittedly I have to say, again speaking for myself, I do not. I will push it as far as I can.

Then there is the physical push and pull (pun? scotts? Ya think??!!!). Personal space is tested. Case in point: there is a manager where I work who is the epitome of a scottian male. One day while I was standing at the cash register he came in behind me to grab the drop box. As he was doing so he asked me if I had a problem with personal space (ha ha yeah right). Of course my answer was a laughing no. He said he just wanted to make sure because some people do. “Not me” I piped up with a big smile.

There is an unmistakable energy. The “tail-twitching” of the scottian female is not initially seen physically or overtly. She is more mindful. Playful. But, as would be expected, then comes the body language. I should probably stop here.

I should clarify that the “game” does not happen with every scottian male/scottian female interaction to the same degree. There is obviously a degree of attraction.**

This is my personal experience running into scotts of the male persuasion. As my manager at work (mentioned above) put it, prefacing a joke, “I can be inappropriate with you.” And that statement pretty much sums up the scottian female/scottian male interaction.

Of course I can’t dismiss the sexual aspect of this duo. We are inclined to make sexual innuendos/analogies out of just about everything. Now tell me that you wouldn’t want to be in my shoes. Betcha can’t. You don’t want to discuss or admit that you even think about sex out loud (yeah you clarks and rogers). Come on, let’s hear it. Once a mutual understanding is established (unspoken or otherwise) scotts revel in the inconsequential ability to be sexual. Verbally or otherwise. Either way, it’s fucking fun being a scott. We live for the moment in a world of stimulus-response. So why not get the most out of it?

* remember we all have some of each. It is the predominate characteristics that make us a clark, a scott or a roger.

**attraction being not only of the physical nature. The mind/thoughts/characteristics of all scottian males are the same. A scott is a scott is a scott.

This entry was posted in Psychology and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to The scottian female and the scottian male. Ooh La La

  1. Pingback: What does “a dead balloon is a dead balloon” have to do with Personality Types? Nothing. | The Theory of 3 Personality Types

  2. Hey, just checking in for something new….

  3. Just testing my techo capabilities.

  4. …”You don’t want to admit or discuss that you even think about sex out loud (you clarks and rogers). Come on let’s hear it”.

    OK. Sure. Scene: grocery store, I am cashier. Attractive man in mid 30’s makes a purchase. Wants to pay with debit card. Slides card a couple of times, doesn’t read. I tell him to slide from the bottom up. He tries it, doesn’t work, tries it again, doesn’t work. Then I say “do it faster”, it worked. He then looked at me, laughed and said something to the effect “like no one’s told me that before”. I replied, “hey, I’m not going to touch that one”. We both started laughing pretty yard …. until I finally got out “you said it not me”. He then said “I can’t believe I’m blushing”.
    This example is simply me being the clarklike female that I am with (what appeared) a rogerian male. Having said this, I think that the difference between scottian women (and clarklike women) is the lack of innuendo (of you scottian ladies) in the sense that you guys say it/blurt it/proclaim it straight out. You are the literal ones. There is no doubt what it is you are “trying to say”.
    Now, if I replayed the same scene but inserted a scottian male, the ensuing conversation likely would have had some customers standing there with their jaws on the floor….

    • “I tell him to slide from the bottom up… do it faster…” That would’ve been the jumping off point unequivocally for a scott. It’s the imagery. No need for words in this instance. Enough said.

  5. clark says:

    lol all…right!
    …just when the Intelligent Design folks had their case for divine creation…almost turned into the law of the land…now we have to deal with this perspective on human behavior… Hey Bill, yo …tell us again…
    “What a piece of work is a man! How noble in
    Reason! how infinite in faculties! in form and moving
    how express and admirable! In action how like an Angel!
    in apprehension how like a god!”

    … how can you not like scotts with this added insight!

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s